BillHawks wrote:Nothing really changed (if anything I think it's a positive), that's all you need to know. I'm sure pinksheets will be here shortly to talk you down.

Man I hope so, but when it comes to the deadline that the Maloofs set, I see it as them, the Maloofs, thinking that there are enough votes to shoot down the Hansen bid and they are trying to make sure that they can get the amount of money offered no matter what group it is. God......I hope I'm wrong.

I just got home from work so have been basically following this story by glancing at twiter when I could, but my early impression is that this is the beginning of the end.

I know the Maloofs are jerks and idiots, but they didn't do this on their own. KJ has been running his mouth ever since April 3rd, putting words into the mouths of the NBA Board of Governors, telling people openly about conversations that happened behind closed doors, etc., all a bunch of things someone who doesn't have an inside track would do (namely pretending, publicly, that they have an inside track). Yesterday, what happened? Bizarre propaganda media blitz from just about every Sacramento based reporter. They have parroted KJ all along, and even reportedly held off on reporting stories that would cross KJ's efforts (even though they were true). The propaganda blitz, in my eyes, was a blatant attempt to shift the narrative as hard in one direction as possible, to try to make the Kings staying an inevitability, painting the NBA in a corner to follow that narrative. I mean today Steinberg even said they matched the offer dollar for dollar, but quickly had to retract that statement (probably because they woke the sleeping giant).

Yes, the sleeping giant. Like I said, the Maloofs have not set this deadline and made this public statement to Sacramento's group to put up or shut up once and for all on their own. They certainly would not do this without Hansen and Ballmer's blessing. They seem to have a decent partnership with Hansen and Ballmer, and soliciting another offer (even as a "backup") would be potentially legally troublesome for them and running it by Chris and Steve would just make good sense to avoid that. Perhaps Hansen and Ballmer even endorsed the idea. But Hansen and Ballmer wouldn't go rogue. They've been working with the NBA for a while now, they've held to their gag order, etc. etc., and would not want to burn any bridges and would never take the risk. Which is why I think that sleeping giant has been awoken, and that's the NBA. I would not be surprised at all if the NBA has grown tired of KJ's PR campaign and attempts to politic the league to make the decision he desires. Stern and the NBA have always wanted to come out of this thing looking clean, and KJ has made that night impossible right now, so it would not shock me at all to hear that the NBA endorsed this plan to say "Ok, put your money where your mouth is. Put it in writing that you will be paying the Maloofs the same amount as Hansen in the event that the current PSA is denied." Sacramento's group hasn't put any money down. They've been all talk, and now they're talking with a level of arrogance and straight up bullsh*t that has made the situation untenable. If they don't match the offer, it gives the NBA all the room in the world to say "look, we gave you a chance, but you didn't put up the money."

And according to Chris Daniels, the numbers are still way off.

I like what Furness said: If Sacramento fails to match the offer, it's game over; if they do match the offer, it's game on.

I said it way back in page 20-something, but, pinksheets is carrying ALOT of us in this thread. I check this thread every few hours to get pink's cold-blooded analysis of it. Or, I seek out pinks posts in this thread when/if I hear something concerning. Whatever the case, I always feel better about things.

Zybot wrote:You don't really want the NBA to cut the Blazers do you? I'm a Portland transplant and a Blazer fan. Most Blazer fans want to see the Sonics back. The team has good support, and a good owner.

With a week to go before the Board of Govenors and no concrete offer to buy, and no concrete Arena plan to look at, all this media footage and press conferences from Sacramento and leading it Two politicians in Steinburg and Johnson I can only assume the Maloofs who were pissed off at how things have went there, the NBA which wants this to look and feel legit compared to the Seattle fiasco and the Hansen group all have grown tired of the posterizeing to get sentiment on their side of the City.

KJ is trying to manage this like a political campaign with misinformation, getting a lot of face time and using his name. Is he even part of the group or put any money in this deal to be the face of the ownership group? The NBA has to be looking at this as the Maloofs were bad, but who invited the rest of the circus to the party. Do we want this group to be part of our league?

I think the more KJ spouts and gets in the headlines now the deeper the hole they are digging. As one person said on KJR today, Sacramento can't sue if they get turned down, sueing the NBA will make getting a team impossible in the future. Nickels never was public and fought for keeping the Sonics anywhere close to KJ, but he was also not dumb enough to try to sue the NBA for more money. Yeah they reached a settlement for the Bennett group to leave, but it was done quickly and the politicians were more interested in seeing what money they could get for the Pink Elephant that is Key arena then keeping the team here.

To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!! Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. Member of the 38 club.

Blitzer88 wrote:Brock Huard ‏@BrockESPN 1hI don't like what I am hearing out of NYC. My mind clearly says SEA, but political weight in CA no joke, much bigger than KJ.

Brock Huard ‏@BrockESPN 53mWhat I'm saying is this is much bigger than the cast of characters has been. This isn't whales, its warships. I still believe

Brock Huard seems to be concerned now too.

CA political weight isn't what it appears, we have two of the biggest Senators as far as influence in DC in Cantwell and Murrey, if they try to play big league politics I'm sure they will get involved as well. Remember Slade Gorton is still highly influencial as well. He knows how the sports game is played. Shame he was involved in that leak that was part of the litigation we were using to keep the Sonics from moving but his experience in the arena is much better then anyone in California save anyone associated with the Raiders.

To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!! Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. Member of the 38 club.

Zybot wrote:You don't really want the NBA to cut the Blazers do you? I'm a Portland transplant and a Blazer fan. Most Blazer fans want to see the Sonics back. The team has good support, and a good owner.

I think he was just messing with the local blazer fans a bit, nobody would want to see the blazers go anywhere for real.

The sonics/Blazers rivalry has always been more about a little fun trash talking and not about hate.

I'm a fan of no team until the Sonics come back but I would much rather see the blazer's succeed than others. (even though the nba is dead to me until we get another team)

I went to the OKC/POR game last year, at the end after the game a few of us wher eshouting SUUUUPPEER, SOOOONICCS and a portland fan told us to fuck off and this is about POR not seattle, a fight was brewing and I said " dude what are you going to do to him? they already took our team." the portland fan laughed and we all walked away.

4/27/13 - I was there #humblethug"He looked like a bad man," Sherman said, "and I knew we were alright."

Note that KJ can take a solid minute to imply that they're matching but can't say it unequivocally. There's a reason for that.

They aren't matching and it's unlikely that they commit to do so. It's not easy to make money off of an NBA team in a middling market whose residents have little spending power with zero chance of the big bucks from an RSN. Putting down a $525m valuation ain't worth it, it'd be a charity move. Take into consideration that if they entered into a binding agreement with the Maloofs to match the offer if the Seattle bid is denied, they'd be doing so without a binding arena deal. They'd then own a grossly overpriced NBA team relative to its market and that city council would have a ton of leverage to work out a deal (keep in mind that they really haven't worked one out, just a list of ideas) in their favor.

This talk about stern trying to help sac is probably him just going through the motions in case things get ugly, he can say he did everything he could and doesn't look like he's completely abandoning sac.

I'm starting to think Kj is doing the same thing. If he appears to be busting his ass trying to save the team he'll be a hero to the people of Sacramento after the team leaves and keep getting elected.

I have a feeling this is all preemptive damage control and for the most part this is a done deal.

The Seattle group has done an amazing job doing EVERYTHING right and the sac group has done way too little way too late.

Uh on............Pink, don't tell me you are wavering too........ ou were the only one keeping me somewhat away from the ledge.

"It's a tough call but I agree. If Stern is not committed to just making sure the majority turns into an overwhelming consensus and is willing to go vote by vote to get his way, I think we lose. I do think the owners are all business, but I don’t think this will be a Stern v. BoG war, I think he can pry enough to give him a parting gift if this is all he really wants before retirement."

Blitzer88 wrote:Uh on............Pink, don't tell me you are wavering too........ ou were the only one keeping me somewhat away from the ledge.

"It's a tough call but I agree. If Stern is not committed to just making sure the majority turns into an overwhelming consensus and is willing to go vote by vote to get his way, I think we lose. I do think the owners are all business, but I don’t think this will be a Stern v. BoG war, I think he can pry enough to give him a parting gift if this is all he really wants before retirement."

NO. Don't you go on SonicsRising where I do my rollercoaster riding so I can come here and be a good Sonics-father to you!

I do think Stern can pull this off if he wants his legacy to be a contentious fight to keep a team in a poor economic market just because it was his pet project. If he wants to fall on his sword and alienate a great ownership group just to play hero in his final year, even though he'd take a ton of flack for screwing Seattle underhandedly again, I think he probably has enough clout to pull in the favors to get only 8 owners to go that way.

I don't think he will. I think he can be talked out of trying this, I'm not even sure he's committed to going all the way in this, just that if he prefers to be a commissioner that goes out in a blaze of glory pissing off most of his league's owners, I think he might be able to pull it off. He might also be asked to resign by the NBA for interfering and acting as an agent of the Sacramento investor group.

So, do I think Stern could call in enough favors to keep the team in Sacramento if he's willing to bet his entire reputation on it? Sure.

But you know what I believe is more likely? That I'm buying my boy Blitzer a beer at a Sonics game this year.

"And so - whether Sacramento or any team - it's going to be up to somebody to go in there and acquire the team, and then make an application to move the team to Seattle. What I can tell you is I can't imagine any owner standing in the way of that. … I'd be shocked if any owner stood up and said that was a bad idea."

What I will always cling to; Owners don't want to be told what to do by other Owners.

This is not like the vote to approve the Sonics to OKC (when Cuban and Allen voted "no" or abstained from voting) due to the fact that this is a clear-cut move that drives up the value of the NBA as a product. Sacramento is the 11th most valuable team in the NBA; should the owners deny Hansen and his group, they are voting down the value of their own franchises.

Balmer, Hanson and Nordstrom are not buying the team as a sound business move... it's definitely leaning towards "sports charity" and that is why Sacramento is having such a hard time. I view this exactly the same when Balmer offer Bennett and his group $350 for the Sonics contingent of getting the city and country to transfer the Arena tax to extend to KeyArena. A last ditch effort that is good in theory, but not based on any true backing.

sammyc521 wrote:What I will always cling to; Owners don't want to be told what to do by other Owners.

This is not like the vote to approve the Sonics to OKC (when Cuban and Allen voted "no" or abstained from voting) due to the fact that this is a clear-cut move that drives up the value of the NBA as a product. Sacramento is the 11th most valuable team in the NBA; should the owners deny Hansen and his group, they are voting down the value of their own franchises.

Balmer, Hanson and Nordstrom are not buying the team as a sound business move... it's definitely leaning towards "sports charity" and that is why Sacramento is having such a hard time. I view this exactly the same when Balmer offer Bennett and his group $350 for the Sonics contingent of getting the city and country to transfer the Arena tax to extend to KeyArena. A last ditch effort that is good in theory, but not based on any true backing.

Boom!

-salute-

I can't wait to watch KJs presser on the 19th conceding, god that's gonna be beautiful!

As someone who isnt really a sonic fan (no not really a blazer fan much either, since the jail blazer years i began to lose intrest. Then they signed with comcast, which made it so my part of the state couldnt see the games) it seems to me the Sactown people are blowing smoke. KJ continues to talk a good game, but yet he won't really say what the offer is and how they plan to purchase the land for the arena. In fact if they do keep the team, I won't be shocked to never see this arena built.

It seems the Hansen group has been very forthright about the offer and new arena. Again from a spot of casual observer, the Seattle guys have there stuff together a lot more the sac people. In an ideal world I would want to see both city's get to have an NBA team, but if the owners have to choose I don't see at this point how Seattle doesn't get the team.

pinksheets wrote:Note that KJ can take a solid minute to imply that they're matching but can't say it unequivocally. There's a reason for that.

They aren't matching and it's unlikely that they commit to do so. It's not easy to make money off of an NBA team in a middling market whose residents have little spending power with zero chance of the big bucks from an RSN. Putting down a $525m valuation ain't worth it, it'd be a charity move. Take into consideration that if they entered into a binding agreement with the Maloofs to match the offer if the Seattle bid is denied, they'd be doing so without a binding arena deal. They'd then own a grossly overpriced NBA team relative to its market and that city council would have a ton of leverage to work out a deal (keep in mind that they really haven't worked one out, just a list of ideas) in their favor.

That's a great point. If the highest-valued team in history is in Seattle with Hanson's already-approved Temple of Solomon, that's one thing, but if its' the half-ass Kings without an arena, the owners are absolutely screwed. This friday demand feels like a very carefully concieved power move by high-level corporate lawyers who know precisely what the stakes are for the Sac group.